2009/3/2 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>: > All right, I understand. The question now is: are you sure it is in > "your" interest to be that selfish. It is not a moral question: can > you be coherent, take the full piece of botter "dead is not big deal" > of the midazolam argument, and keep that sort of selfishness. > > Do you prefer to live in a country 1 where "self-torture" is allowed > but only when the decision is made before the duplication (and yes you > could be the victim indeed), or in a country 2 where "self-torture" is > allowed after the duplication. It seems to me that your midazolam- > argument (I re-quote below(*)) should in fine relativize the very > notion of selfishness. > > I think it is preferable to live in the first country: yes I could be > the victim, but I can remember my consent. In the second type of > country, I could even more so be the tortured one ... eventually; and > without my consent. OK?
Living in the first country is equivalent to allowing a contract where you agree to a gain today at the cost of suffering tomorrow, like selling your soul to the devil. -- Stathis Papaioannou --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
